Saturday, March 17, 2007

Adhesive latex accentuating the headlights and a micro-skirt that would embarrass Supergirl to be seen in.

That outfit is what DC is having Mary Marvel (the avatar of good magic, the last hold-out of purity and a strong female character who as far as I know hasn't been raped yet) wear in the upcoming Countdown series. Okay, Mary is probably possessed by the evil baddie Eclipso or something when she dons the sexy plastic and engages in semi-public electro-stimulation of her secondary sex organs, but when all the thud and blunder is over with after her Seduction of the Innocent story I would bet that Mary decides to opt for a fashionable "costume update" that won't be as as innocently wholesome as her usual Shazam-wear. Mary Marvel has a long and distinguished history stretching back to the Golden Age of Comics of not showing off the goodies primarily because her character is not defined solely by her sexuality.

I choose to assume that this is "Mistress Mary Marvel" from JLA Classified #8. There, DC, I've given you an out. Take it. Please.

BTW, Marionette, as I read that "Supergirl Plus" story, it was more of a Rashomon thing, where Mary felt that she was going to be sexually assaulted because she didn't know the context of the encounter -- and the policeman's conduct would have made more sense if he had caught the shoplifter he thought he had, instead of poor Mary Batson.

This is just wrong. Granted, I thought Mary was quite the cutie-patootie when I was 7, but it was an innocent infatuation (I didn't know what sex *was* at that time). This is a massive betrayal of the character's 60 year history and takes away what makes her special.

Anonymous, you call THAT pornface? Apparently you've never seen the recent work of one Greg Land.

If I were you all, I'd wait for the interiors before working myself into a lather. Who's handling the interiors? If it's somebody like, say, Peter Snejberg or Michael Lark, chances are you've got nothing to worry about. This may be a classic case of "don't judge a book by its cover".

She wasn't violated if that's what you mean but the indication that she was definitely touched inappropriately. I mean the cop weeping in the back of the car kinda sealed the guilt at the end of the issue.